8. The inadequacy of words and mathematical symbols in the transmission of one individual’s understanding to another – 2019

It is impossible to know what is going on in the mind of someone else with any accuracy. We still have no real or valid idea of how the brain works to produce thoughts from our minds. However, the way in which one individual’s mind is working and the conclusions reached or impressions experienced can be conveyed in principle, albeit not in much accurate detail, to others via words spoken verbally, or better, in words recorded in writing or also recorded electronically. They can also be expressed and transmitted via mathematical proofs and algebraic symbols for those fluent in the very specialised subject of maths. Finally diagrams or accurate drawings and illustrations are another method of transferring to others the contents of how one person sees the world. It seems to me that the latter is perhaps the easiest and most expressive and accurate way of transferring information from one mind to another although there are not that many people adequately skilled in representational art to be capable of the latter as a transmitter.

I have developed a thesis, Duplication Theory, which describes a modus operandi for the mechanism behind memory, still very much a tabula rasa. It depends on the fairly recent discovery and research on phenomena known as quantum entanglement. My thesis shows how similar structures in certain circumstances will tend to resonate through time, from the past to the present, which is effectively memory’s function. There is little need for me in this essay to go into much detail involved, but one result of my researches into that subject has drawn me to consider the way in which the thoughts of one individual can be best disseminated to others, via any of the three possibilities mentioned above. My basic premise is that the most accurate and comprehensive method for the brain to import information from the external world is by sight via images formed on the retinas and thence into the brain to be processed. This paper presents a description in outline on how this is done most efficiently, and why mathematics and the spoken/written word are insufficient.

If intelligence had developed via all the other senses without sight, the result would be very different and would produce a sensate individual of far less cognate ability than the human race has today. To delve further into the mechanism of sight it is necessary to realise that what we see in front of us is not the actual real world but rather an image of it which is projected from the brain, having been registered and then recorded in some way by the processes within that brain. Using the information gained thereby, understanding of nature and how we might better improve our chances of survival are cultivated and then put into effect as time passes and human behaviour made more sophisticated. This is achieved over thousands of generations mainly through information taken in visually, and it is therefore crucial to examine in more detail the nature of sight and how it operates in physical terms. If we are not actually in contact via our minds with the external world physically, what is it that we are registering, and how is this done?

Obviously light is emitted from objects outside the body on to the retinas and somehow this causes the reproduction within our brains of an image of the external world, but no individual mind will see the latter in exactly the same way: for instance, some people are colour blind. These images have to be entirely subjective and different even if viewed in each case from exactly the same position. So, what is the process that creates such images and how can it be described? The best possible answer is that these images are most likely to be based on some form of holographic representation which would be projected from the processes within the brain. How these might be viewed is another matter which is quite complex based on a quantum entanglement resonance and described in some of my other papers. The latter will not be dealt with here in any detail, but any sighted person it is very familiar with the effect, the result of which is that what we see is an image of the external world in line of sight projected out from the brain in three dimensions. The latter is one of the striking characterises of the hologram over ordinary flat photographic images. I therefore make what seems to me to be a reasonable assumption that ability to view the external world is based on some form of holographic image.

This also the conclusion of the late neuroscientist Karl Pribram whom I met in the1980s having corresponded with him and who encouraged my version of the mind’s operation, and who then later collaborated with physicist David Bohm to produce what they called the holonomic brain theory, some of whose rationale in physics is similar to mine and parts of which I adapted to reinforce further my own proposals. Very briefly I conjectured that the passage of electrical charge between the hugely complex structure of neurons and clusters of dendrites within the brain, would create electromagnetic waves which would inevitably produce interference patterns. If these structures were highly ordered which they would be as the source of rational thought and memory, then the interference patterns thereby created would be the source of the holograms.

The strongest of these would be experienced as vision having been processed from the occipital lobe at the back of the brain. However, there would also be more vestigial structures introduced from memory instigation sources (probably closely related to DNA molecules and which I describe as engrams) stored physically from other parts of the brain. These would interact with the visual incoming information to indicate the best method of dealing with the changing circumstances of the external world. But the whole point of describing in outline this part of the operation of memory is to emphasise how the brain takes in huge amounts of visual information to be processed into holographic form.

Elements of the latter can then be stored as engrams to be instigated later as longer sequences of memory resonating with past sequences if required, the result of which is that the brain is stocked with far more mental information from the visual sense than the combination of the information incoming from all the other senses. All this visual information stored in memory can be either be combined, now or later with other structures recalled from earlier times which might then result in increased ability to make fresh conclusions about how forth coming circumstances might be produced to enhance future survival. In other words, constructive thought relies almost entirely of what has been experienced visually in the past.

In summary the conclusion that can be drawn from my thesis Duplication theory to explain the operation of memory, depends on the construction and the significance of three-dimensional images, not only in the way that they are taken in from the external world but also the manner in which they are reproduced in memory and conscious thought. I hazard a guess that the mechanism of memory provides about 75% of the mechanism of thought and once ascertained and validated, other aspects of the mind’s operation such as intuition and consciousness will be resolved rapidly thereafter. I have an answer for intuition which depends on the role of randomness which is also a significant factor in quantum entanglement which dovetails in well with my thesis for memory, although consciousness is more demanding with worrying gaps in my explanation thus far.

To return to the central point of this paper’s discussion, I can now more easily compare the effectiveness of the various ways of transmitting one individual’s understanding of nature and the external world over to the mind of another. The most efficient and accurate way would be to allow the holographic structures projected from the mind of one to be duplicated in the mind of the other, or indeed many others. This would otherwise beknown as telepathy which is a subject which is much discussed and contentious, and can only at best be regarded possibly as an occasional fringe effect, best demonstrated between identical twins, and which I will disregard. 

So, if there is substance in the Holonomic brain theory of Bohm and Pribram (see Wikipedia) to reinforce my own version of Duplication theory, then the mind’s principle modus operandi is by forming holographic images projected from the brain registered as visual images. These are then combined with the more vestigial images from memory which are evoked thereby of similar past circumstances, and which in turn allow the mind to deduce the best response physically to deal with a new situation. As a brief and simple definition of Duplication theory, it can be summarised:

“Equal intervals in space -similar structures- tend to duplicate themselves through all time in the same location” which is effectively the corollary of the second part: “Equal intervals in time -similar actions- tend to duplicate themselves through all space at one moment in time.”

This second part shows how information is transferred through space simultaneously, and which is familiar as Electromagnetic radiation (see some of my other papers on this website) and I will not go into that here other than to comment that it has much in Common with Bohm’s theses and also the Absorber theory of Wheeler and Feynman, and to comment that it is based on the way in which structures similar to the point of singularity will have an increasing tendency to resonate through both time and space, as experiments on quantum entanglement have started to demonstrate in the last few years.  

The conclusions of such a thesis, on how memory and cognition are principally based on visual information, are intriguing. For example, an individual develops a novel way of understanding circumstances observed in the external world, and this needs to be explained to everybody else, especially if he or she considers it will generate an improvement to his life style, and maybe better yet, to mankind generally. How is this done?  He can explain it verbally or more likely write it down to get it published one way or the other. If he is also very articulate with a pleasant manner, he will succeed more rapidly with the benefit of multimedia, assuming the content is of consequence to the rest of us, or at least appears to be.

This applies even more so to creative artists who record facets of the world in a new manner, and very often this does not have to be understood and explained as to why it is so striking.  People with a strong visual sense should be able to pick up more easily what is going on in the mind of the artist and why it has a deeper insight than has been managed hitherto, and then they might explain to the rest of us verbally in writing why it is a crucial break through, after which it becomes fashionable. But the essence is that the contents mind of the creator is transferred to others, and very often this initially takes time for the rest of us to become convinced and impressed, but those elect few with strong visual sense very often understand instantly.

Things appear different in the world of science. For instance, Einstein came up in 1905 with his special theory of relativity, and although other scientists probably realised that initially that it might be an important insight, it could not be regarded as such until it had been shown to be sanctioned by a mathematical proof, followed by convincing experimental results carried out. Members of the scientific community have to be trained in such procedures, which usually demand high mathematical ability, which I regard as another form of language, albeit greatly specialised with not that many capable or trained to necessarily such high standards. So mathematical proofs are handicapped by the fact that very few members of the public can understand them. However, if the results become of consequence, there will be later explanations made in easy, or at least fairly easy descriptions, much of which will still incomprehensible to most. But in the end the public will be able to appreciate the consequences of such sophisticated theories, and this can take years or decades.

There is a further problem with science and mathematics: it is based on assumptions on the nature of the universe, such as the assumed fact of crucial constants such lightspeed never vary, and gravitation ditto, but now even these bulwarks of the world of science are being challenged in which case all the precision that mathematical proofs have given us, might well have to be amended. And such amendments are more often than not brought about by observation of astronomers and cosmologists. The problem of dark matter and energy is a fine example of this as was the work of Saul Perlmutter’s team when they discovered in 1998 that the rate of expansion of the universe was not constant but instead accelerating. The result is that another formerly established constant and belief structure disappears overnight, just like that.

Another recent example of this effect is Bell’s Inequality theorem from 1964 which showed that simultaneous events did not have to be subject to light speed, and quantum theory’s faster than light effects were possible. The effect of this research has made some effect on our lives already but this is as nothing as it will be when the subject is better understood and mastered, assuming that happens. If we could devise a method of transferring the mindset of one individual to someone else, or better still many others, in the form of the holographic images from the mind of the originator, then things would become very clear all of a sudden, and many problems rapidly resolved. However, we cannot yet do that but my Duplication theory indicates a possible means via quantum entanglement whereby that might be possible. One of its requirements for the operation of memory was that it was only possible if the brain was capable of being put into a state of its cognitive neurons and dendrites being able to fire absolutely randomly. I take this as being tantamount to emptying the mind and placing it into trance, a state which brings out very different abilities in most people. Thus, if two separate minds were in deep trance at the same time, they would be as close to being perfect duplicates of each other as it was ever possible to achieve. In other words, it would be a very close approach to an impossible to achieve singularity state. The essence of Duplication theory as explained in my other papers is that although perfect duplication of two separate structures is never achievable according to the Uncertainty Principle, when a very close approach is made to that state, the two will start to resonate/be correlated either across time and/or space via quantum entanglement.

Then if one specific thought structure was placed into the one mind, there would be a tendency for the other follow suit in certain circumstances. Or if there was no other individual involved then a similar earlier structure stored physically in the brain as engrams, similar to DNA molecules, would be evoked as a specific moment of a memory frame which would act to instigate an earlier sequence of recollection, which would continue to play until interrupted. This would effectively result in eidetic memory, or trance state, if left unperturbed by other input. However, to account for everyday working memory, it would be necessary for a few later stored engrams to rapidly invoke later curtailed sequences, telescoping the record of this earlier event which endured maybe twenty seconds, into a brief memory recapitulation of a few micro seconds. This would allow appropriate life enhancing action to be taken very rapidly.   This first occurred to me in about 1979 which was well before all but very few had heard of quantum entanglement. I managed to read about this subject in any depth in 2015, and am now aware that many of the physical experiments for arranging instantaneous transfer of photons from one place to any other, more correctly described as correlated, involves both the transmitting and receiving equipment being able to fire absolutely randomly, a requirement of Bell’s theory.

This was very gratifying and hardly just coincidental, but more research needs to be delivered on the nature of quantum mechanics, before my proposals can take be taken more seriously. Having said that I stand by my assertion that the way in which the mind is furnished with its cognate abilities is mainly through vision and that unless anybody can suggest any better form of explanation, this must be via holographic projections from the brain, or something very similar. The conclusions I reached earlier indicate to me that verbal or written descriptions of the workings of one brain are very inadequate, and those of the mathematicians in their highly specialist language even more inadequate other than in a few special cases.   

Nick Greaves